> For all the recent progress in wind and solar energy, renewables on their own almost certainly won’t be enough. Arguably, then, we have no choice but to figur

> For all the recent progress in wind and solar energy, renewables on their own almost certainly won’t be enough. Arguably, then, we have no choice but to figure out how to build nuclear plants affordably again. What's the logic behind this? Technology X and Y are making great progress but for unstated reasons won't be enough in some vague way so we need technology Z which is making much less progress. I can think of complicated arguments you could make to support this view, but I don't think they stand up so it's odd to see it just stated without support. Though maybe they start the sentence with "Arguably" because they don't really believe it either. For reference see the recent Australian CSIRO report where they asses nuclear and, even assuming they can build them as well as South Korea, finds it more expensive than continuing with renewables.